When I was press secretary for President Obama, my strategy was simple: I spoke directly with the president and didn't make a habit of lying to the American people.Well, of course, you don't want to make a habit of lying to the American people. That's just pathological. A good press secretary lies when it serves a specific purpose. If you just make a habit out of lying, you lose the advantage of all the times when saying what's true is actually in your interest and you miss all the cute chances — like the one you're using here, Josh — where telling a cagy truth works the same way as a good straightforward bald-faced lie.*
You and I both know that's not how the Trump administration operates. Between the constant staff upheaval and drama, the rogue tweets, and overall failure to put the interests of the American people first, it's clear this administration is in utter chaos.Apparently, Josh wants me to feel like I'm in a special club with him — "You and I" — and we have knowledge together and there's chaos. We "know"! Eh. I don't know. What makes tweets "rogue"? I don't even get the concept. Seems to me, Trump just talks to us directly when he's got something he wants to say.
He may be a rogue ("A dishonest, unprincipled person; a rascal, a scoundrel" or "A mischievous person, esp. a child; a person whose behaviour one disapproves of but who is nonetheless likeable or attractive" (OED)), but I don't agree that the tweets are rogue ("Aberrant, anomalous; misplaced, occurring (esp. in isolation) at an unexpected place or time" or "Inexplicably faulty or defective" (OED)).
And I really don't like seeing characterizations like that portrayed as "knowledge," especially when I'm being roped into it. I supposedly "know" things I don't even believe. And yet it's "clear" that there's "chaos"... and not just chaos, "utter chaos."
I feel like some clown named Josh just popped in to madly gesticulate and grimace. You're not going to alarm and activate me like that. But I never give money, so I'm just a recipient of over-inclusive email. I could unsubscribe, but then I couldn't write posts like this. You have my data and I have yours. You have your channels of communication, and I have mine.
Skipping ahead in that email:
I am deeply concerned that the Trump administration is doing lasting damage to the bond between the American people and their government -- and I can imagine you feel the same way.I appreciate that he's admitting it's just his imagination now, but I must say I feel a little creeped out by the notion of a "bond between the American people and their government" that must be preserved. I believe in maintaining a separation between oneself and the government. It's dangerous for individuals to feel bonded to government. That sounds like fascism. I think if Trump is making individuals feel less oneness with government, that's good. I'm not a fan of chaos, but too much order is fascistic. I like my distance, separation, and objectivity. One thing I love about Trump — which was not true of Obama — is that we all feel so free and energized to criticize and insult him and just hate him. It's so wholesome... health-giving... salubrious.**
_______________________
* Yesterday, when I was complaining about Hillary, I said:
Hillary Clinton's approach to communication is so annoying. I'm not a Trump fan, but he's at least a straight talker — even when lying! It works for his fans and his antagonists. He's energizing. She, on the other hand, is such a pain. Imagine having to follow the daily blather of President Hillary Clinton.Not all my readers share my sense of humor. Some people took the trouble to write comments telling me it didn't make sense to say that someone who was lying could be a straight talker. It makes sense to me. That's why you can have a bald-faced lie. Would you prefer a hairy-faced lie? More of a bearded hipster character?
** I love that word, "salubrious." It reminds me of the hardest I ever laughed during a live theater performance, as I told you — if you were reading back then — in 2004:
The play was [Turgenev's] "A Month in the Country," and at the beginning of a scene, where a number of things were going on, a minor character came out and said "The weather is very salaboobious today." Now that was supposed to be funny, but it was just way too funny compared to everything else that surrounded it, and in fact it brought peals of laughter that continued far into the scene.
Posts
101 comments:
I can never tell whether or not to take Josh Ernest seriously.
Your not free to hate Trump, you are obligated to hate Trump. By the very same people who insisted you love Obama. Because, at heart, they are fascists.
Who is targeted with this approach? Does it really persuade people to donate?
Maybe it works on dim-witted Marge at the grocery store or the elderly ladies at the Lutheran Home. Don't worry, you're not alone. Just pull the Obama doll out of your purse and remember the days when Josh told you smooth truths and teased you in a playful way. And give us some money or else Trump will get you.
If only his name was Ernest Earnest.
Missed opportunity, there, Mr. and Mrs. Earnest.
Or, since you named him Josh, how about Gosh Darnit Earnest.
But back to Ernest Earnest:
There is some good in every one. Ernest has just been telling me about his poor invalid friend Mr. Bunbury whom he goes to visit so often. And surely there must be much good in one who is kind to an invalid, and leaves the pleasures of London to sit by a bed of pain.
Josh pegs my smarmometer.
I think if Trump is making individuals feel less oneness with government, that's good.
I didn't want Trump. I didn't vote for him in the Primary. But this statement is why I had no problems going to the polls for the general election and voting for him. It was fairly obvious that with him as President; there would be a push to discredit him and sow distrust in his government. I'm perfectly fine with convincing Americans to have some distrust in their government. That was worth my vote.
My feelings exactly, Ann, and during Obama’s two terms I felt like I was living in the former East Germany except with better cars. The worst joke any late-night comic would make about him was that he left his socks on the floor. It was beyond creepy.
With all that said, Ann, I want some money from you. And this time, I. AM. NOT. LYING. I want your money. And I want it NOW. The Democrats have just gotta get back in power. It's just gotta happen. Because our progressive values are just too important to be cast aside. See how well Venezuela is doing. Well, with your help, that could the United States. And you're critical to that happening. Please use the postage-paid envelope. But respond NOW.
Your best bud, Josh
It's dangerous for individuals to feel bonded to government. That sounds like fascism.
I've thought for awhile now that the leftist are close to going full fascist.
They have abandoned free speech and the rule of law. They no longer believe in accountable government. They are using schools and corporations to punish their political opponents. They even embraced violent gangs to suppress and break up political gatherings.
I have no idea where all this is going. And I'm not some rabid right-winger. I consider myself a liberal.
This is the way progs talk. They are concerned, worried, and, mostly, afraid.
Trump's tweets tantalize and torment the token teenyboppers.
Wait--is he saying Obama always put the interests of the American people first? When did that happen? I must have been in the bathroom or something. If that were true, Red Diaper Barry's dad and Uncle Frank must have been wailing and gnashing their teeth in Commie Hell more than usual. "WHERE DID WE GO WRONG???!!!"
gspencer,
"See how well Venezuela is doing."
But they never say that. Dave Barry nailed it in his 2016 in Review column:
"Clinton faces an unexpectedly strong challenge from Bernie Sanders, a feisty 217-year-old Vermont senator with a message of socialism, but the good kind of socialism where everybody gets a lot of free stuff, not the kind where starving people fight over who gets the lone remaining beet at the co-op."
I'm not some rabid right-winger. I consider myself a liberal
The American right is classical liberal, you can be both. Although, a pure liberal is, in principle, merely divergent. The American center is conservative: classical liberal tempered by Christian religious/moral (e.g. individual dignity, intrinsic value) philosophy.
The Democrats have the GOPe helping them to do well in the midterms with that abortion of a spending bill.
I think their chances of beating Trump in 2020 are zero but they managed to get Nixon after he won 49 states in 1972 so there is that.
Inga got the same email. She thought that she and Josh were kindred spirits, sharing the same thoughts and feelings. Meant to be. And he is so dreamy. Damn Althouse, now she'll know she wasn't the only one.
There is order in chaos that evades our perception due to insufficient knowledge and skill. Perhaps Earnest is earnest, but his personal testimony is chaotic. It's the same for other publishers, individual and corporate.
Unnecessary adverbs of that type always remind me of dialog from a movie. This particular unnecessary adverb reminds me of two examples.
Two related scenes, both from A Few Good Men:
Oh you strenuously object?
And:
Col. Jessup: [refering to Santiago] I felt his life might be in danger.
Kaffee: Grave danger?
Col. Jessup: [sarcastically] Is there another kind?
[Later, pivotal scene]
Kaffee: That's not what you said. You said he was being transferred, because he was in grave danger.
Col. Jessup: That's correct.
Kaffee: You said he was in danger. I said "grave danger"? You said...
Col. Jessup: I recall what I said.
Kaffee: I could have the court reporter read back to you...
I am deeply concerned that the Trump administration is doing lasting damage to the bond between the American people and their government.
I wouldn't say I was ever bonded with my government, but eight years of Obama pretty much destroyed any faith I ever had in it.
but they managed to get Nixon after he won 49 states in 1972
Most people have neither the inclination nor the resources for political engagement beyond the ballot box, let alone sustained participation. So, the anti-Nixon factions had the advantage of opportunity, proximity, [renewable] resources, and bullhorns.
Rogue sentiment (Wm. Empson, _The Structure of Complex Words_ p.205-206)
3+=1bc "The man who is true to the facts of our nature does no more than he need in fulfilling the demands of society"
3a=2/2 "The man who will ot be a hypocrite is Nature's aristocrat"
3a=-1a "...and knows how to tell lies"
3a+=4/1+ "A frank rogue is a good fellow, fit for our set"
4/1-=4/1+ "The independent man is the reliable one"
4=1b+.1c+ "The man who accepts his own desires is generous and faithful to friends"
(numbers refer to equating various senses and subsenses, the equations produced by difference in head meanings and context. + means positive spin, - means deprecatory spin)
Except for the "if you like your plan you can keep your plan" lie.
That was a doozy.
oh and "the average family will save 2500 a year" another doozy.
Common good!
believe in maintaining a separation between oneself and the government.
Government is just the name we give to the crimes we commit together.
I think having a last name of Earnest made it a lie every time he was introduced.
The man walked slowly downstairs and out into the garden. The unicorn was still there; now he was browsing among the tulips. "Here, unicorn," said the man, and he pulled up a lily and gave it to him. The unicorn ate it gravely. With a high heart, because there was a unicorn in his garden, the man went upstairs and roused his wife again. "The unicorn," he said,"ate a lily." His wife sat up in bed and looked at him coldly. "You are a booby..."
http://english.glendale.cc.ca.us/unicorn1.html
Pulchritudinous beats salubrious but if you can use 'em together it's a big win.
Oh you strenuously object?
My thoughts exactly, Hoodlum.
Col. Jessup: [refering to Trump] I felt this administration might be in chaos.
Kaffee: Utter chaos?
Col. Jessup: [sarcastically] Is there another kind?
Dear Ann (may I call you Ann ?) My outlook is lugboobrious.
The Importance of Not Being A Shrill Ninny
How many people received that letter, read the word "rogue", and immediately thought of Sarah Palin?
If you did, it wasn't by accident.
Ah Ms. Althouse, Mr. Earnest was just joshing you.
I too get those "gravely concerned" e-mails from the mandarins and the submandarins and the simple hangers on of the Obama state.
The General Counsel of a Fortune 50 company once told me that the test of a true litigator was whether he or she could convince a jury that bullsh@t tastes like vanilla ice cream.
That's also the test of a White House Press Secretary--and a few of them are or were very good at it. Of course these days it's easier to perform the task in the White House press room if the incumbent President is a Democrat. In that instance, the press corps is eager to believe that what they are lapping up is indeed vanilla ice cream.
Joni Ernst, call your office.
I'm one of the few people left who does not like to be addressed by first name without invitation. Who is Josh Earnest to address you as Ann? I've been reading and commenting here for seven years and I would not call you by your first name. If I knew you in real life I would not, either. You're my mom's age. I'd refer to and address you as Professor Althouse even if we went to church together or you were my neighbor.
And I LOVE being called Mrs. Pants. (Except that's not my actual name. It's a Simpsons joke, incidentally.)
When you make your living as a mouthpiece, a "rogue" communication is any communication that doesn't go through you.
My compliments, Althouse! That was one of the most devastating take downs of a professional bullshitter I have witnessed. A magnificent verbal kick to the groin!
the rogue tweets
From Earnest's point of view, they are "rogue" tweets. They're rogue because both the Obamaites & the Clintonites would never ever do anything so spontaneous as to let Obama or Clinton tweet directly to the masses.
No, every word must be vetted, focus group tested, run by multiple committees of advisors, etc. You know why? Because in their hearts, the Obamaites & Clintonites knew that unfiltered access to their leaders would show the public what dorks they all really were.
So, the anti-Nixon factions had the advantage of opportunity, proximity, [renewable] resources, and bullhorns.
And they had the FBI. Don't forget that.
There is nothing new under the sun.
I Have Misplaced My Pants said...
I'm one of the few people left who does not like to be addressed by first name without invitation.
Well if people refer to you as "I", it's going to be a very confusing conversation.
This is no time for wearing the shallow mask of manners. When I see a spade I call it a spade.
/
I am glad to say that I have never seen a spade. It is obvious that our social spheres have been widely different.
My favorite joke from The Importance of Being Earnest
"bond between the American people and their government"
Aimed at all the Dem women who see the government as their surrogate husband.
"The average man, whatever his errors otherwise, at least sees clearly that government is something lying outside of him and outside the generality of his fellow men— that it is a separate, independent and often hostile power, only partly under his control, and capable of doing him great harm." -- H.L. Mencken
Appreciate the fisking, though Earnest is seriously unworthy.
"I like my distance, separation, and objectivity. You mean, you don't get Social Security and Medicare?
Anyway, Americans now like to be close to government, close enough to get their share of other people's money.
*Who do not like. Yikes.
There's a proper way to lie in Washington, in politics. When a proper politician lies, he does it in a very carefully curated way. In politics, a proper lie is constructed in such a way as to be both defensible and offensible, it take into account the attacks and turn them against the attackers. A proper lie is cunning and clever.
And maybe that's one the many reasons that the Deep States sorts, like Josh here, despise Trump; he doesn't lie properly.
To lose one election, Mrs. Clinton, may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose two looks like carelessness.
I expect that others are now getting personalized emails -- much like the subject email -- from the ReviveAmerica PAC, and the GreatAmerica PAC, and several others, all instructing us that it is time to FIRE MUELLER! and end this WITCH HUNT!
Or maybe not; maybe Althouse, with a limited history of voting for Republicans and (I PRESUME) no personal history of activism/volunteerism for Republicans, and possibly with no history of donating to Republican causes and campaigns, doesn't get them like I do.
Althouse; it's the same thing only different.
If you agree with my comment, I need your support.
Chip in $25 >>
Chip in $50 >>
Chip in $100 >>
Chip in $4.5 billion >>
I am deeply concerned that the Trump administration is doing lasting damage to the bond between the American people and their government -- and I can imagine you feel the same way.
Because, honestly, we're all into bondage. I know I am and I bet you are, too.
You could criticize Obama too, if you were willing to be be called a racist.
"Hey buddy, hey pal." -- political party emails
I love that word, "salubrious."
Here it is in a poem.
Mrs. Pants, 12:01:
"I'm one of the few people left who does not like to be addressed by first name without invitation."
I work in a militantly informal culture. I've taken my cues from my mentors, who would allow you to address them as "Professor ___" twice, and on the third time suggest you call them by first name. But it does rub me the wrong way when people don't wait to be invited, as I do when addressing others.
In my other career, such informality is discouraged. My former commander didn't tell me to call him by first name until I caught up to him in rank, for about five minutes before his next promotion.
Wonderful guy with a great sense of humor, but he could get absolutely frosty in response to uninvited familiarity. When I see letters from strangers that open that way, I remember him bringing some poor clueless lieutenant up short: "I'm sorry, do I know you? Are we buds?"
Familiarity breeds contempt, and vice versa.
"I remember him bringing some poor clueless lieutenant up short: "I'm sorry, do I know you? Are we buds?"
I remember a dental officer in the Air Force who favorite line was "You can call me colonel."
I spent 40 years teaching medical students and office staff to NEVER call patients by their first name.
Now, HIPPA insists, so they say, that all patients be called by first names only.
It makes me angry but I smile and say nothing when some high school dropout calls me by my first name.
Michael K,
"Now, HIPPA insists, so they say, that all patients be called by first names only."
A fine scientific style guide, The Technical Writer's Handbook, suggests avoiding titles in acknowledgments.
"If you insist, though...do not write, 'I am indebted to Dr. M. Richard Mendelson, Dr. Lowell Yemin, and Art Singer for their help.' Whether or not he has a Ph.D., Art Singer is entitled to as much respect as the others, and he has a title too. Write 'I am indebted to Dr. M. Richard Mendelson, Dr. Lowell Yemin, and Mr. Arthur J. Singer for their help.'"
Blogger tim maguire said...
Because, at heart, they are fascists.
They call themselves "progressive" but there is no ideological difference between "progressivism"" and "fascism" (Or "Fascism" to be even more specific."
See Mussolini's "The Doctrine of Fascism".
John Henry
When the Spanish government, the consulate perhaps, sends me a letter, they address me as "Señor Don .... "
And they use the formal "usted".
All of which is right and proper.
OF COURSE he is gravely concerned, Ann.
They demmies are fresh out of money. Actually in the hole, IIRC.
John Henry
What YoungHegelian wrote, about the vetting--or in Trump's case, the lack thereof-- of Trump's tweets reminds me of something Dennis Miller said during the Clinton administration. At that time I think Miller was in the process of getting "woke" in a pro-freedom direction but had already started to question and mock the "liberal" Hive. He said, "At least Reagan believed his own bullshit. Clinton can't to to sleep at night without first reading the index cards George Stephanopoulos leaves on his pillow telling him what talking points to use at tomorrow's press conference." A satiric exageration, of course: Slick Willie was more than capable of concocting his own snake oil, of course. But I'm sure Georgie Boy and the War Room crew had to give it the "will this play in Dubuque?" test first.
It's interesting to me, an old guy who has seen the party line shift repeatedly, how ever since I can remember, whenever some Republican candidate found himself at odds with the "liberal" Hive, those "liberals" derisively talking about that candidate's handlers and string pullers--the theory apparently being that "liberal" policies were SO obviously and SO unquestionably wonderful that only a dupe and mouthpiece would raise any objections to them. Now it seems that Trump is faulted for NOT having handlers and string-puppets. Weird.
In defense of the tone of familiarity in Josh Earnest's missive, let me say in his defense that his organization probably took that tone because they found it works.
There was a story some years back where the Obama campaign was stunned to discover that they had the most response back from an emailing that had as its subject line "Hey!". They, too, could not believe that their recipients would respond to such unprofessional familiarity, but respond they did.
Me? I was raised in the Deep South where anything that had evolved to bipedal locomotion & was featherless was referred to as "Sir" or "Ma'am".
Reading this piece was like savoring a delicious meal.
I wonder if Josh Earnest ever earnestly sent unsolicited Dick pics?
I'm so glad I got to keep my doctor. And my health plan.
Oh, and I saved $2,500, too.
God bless the truth tellers in the Obama Administration.
Althouse wrote:
"You have my data and I have yours."
In light of the Facebook "scandal", do you care to tell us how they got your email or to speculate on how much they know about you and how that knowledge led to this latest email?
That's what many "issue" fundraising letters/emails sound like. It's very off-putting to me. They must think it works or they wouldn't keep doing it.
Napoleon used to look across the Channel at the vicious arguments between the Tories and the Whigs and think that England was at the point of dissolution. In France, by contrast, whenever Napoleon held a referendum on some issue, it passed with 90% approval. Napoleon thought his countrymen were unified and loyal. Napoleon, himself, was rarely criticized in public even when things were manifestly going wrong......Paradoxically, the absence of criticism of a leader is not any indication of the cohesiveness of the society he leads nor of the success of his leadership. It mostly measures his success in stifling opposition. It's disturbing to note that George Washington in his time received far more criticism that Barack Obama did in his. The adulation of Obama by the bullhorn classes was not so healthy for our society.
When they use the tone of familiar friends, it makes them sound like con men.
Both parties do it constantly in their marketing, so it must work. I guess con men use it because it works too.
"In light of the Facebook "scandal", do you care to tell us how they got your email or to speculate on how much they know about you and how that knowledge led to this latest email?"
I don't know about that. Probably through Russ Feingold, whom I gave money maybe 30 years ago. But when Obama appeared on campus, like right on the hill outside my office and I was required to LEAVE my office, because: security — they required everyone who wanted to get into the space — our own space — to see him to get a ticket and to get the ticket you had to give your email to the campaign, so my own employer, part of the state of Wisconsin, participated in a grand email harvesting scheme.
Here the local paper's story about that Obama email harvest:
"A trio of high-profile UW-Madison professors went public Wednesday with concerns about President Barack Obama's planned Thursday campaign rally, saying students who want to attend are unfairly being required to supply a phone number and email address to the campaign, even having to click "I'm In" to get a free ticket at the campaign's website.
""If you want to go to this hugely important and interesting event you have to register with the campaign," said political science professor Donald Downs. "That raises questions."
"Downs was joined by law professor Ann Althouse and political science professor Ken Mayer in raising concerns. Mayer sent a letter outlining four concerns to university administrators on Wednesday. Althouse later shared it with instapundit.com, a conservative-leaning blog run by a Texas law professor.
"Vince Sweeney, vice chancellor for university relations, said the university takes the concerns seriously and will respond formally but hadn't done so as of Wednesday night. In linking to the Obama campaign's registration site on the university's website, the university sought to provide as much information as possible to interested attendees, he said.
""We don't manage the (Obama) link, we're not collecting that information, and ultimately if it's a problem for those wishing to attend, it's an individual decision" whether or not to provide an email address and phone number, he said.""
"takes the concerns seriously"
classic bullshit
When looking at Democrat fundraising emails, marveling at the efficacy of such personal accostments like "Hey!" or referring to someone in a personal way, you should always keep in mind who the target audience is (namely, not you). Looking at it from the outside, it may make the typical Democrat donor seem gullible and simple (and I'd argue they probably are). But you also have to keep in mind they're already very amenable to giving money, so it's just a matter of tuning the language in order to achieve the desired result.
And to be fair, I don't doubt that there are ways and language that can be used to get conservatives to open up their wallets. I'm sure conservatives may be more susceptible to scare tactics like "they're going to take away your guns if you don't act now" as the opening line in a donation request email.
"instapundit.com, a conservative-leaning blog run by a Texas law professor."
When was Glenn in Texas or are those red states all so similar that no one can tell them apart ?
"Now it seems that Trump is faulted for NOT having handlers and string-puppets."
He has those, but they're on Fox.
When I was teaching, students would sometimes want to address me by my first name. I said, "Sure, it's 'Professor.'"
This is what has worked to get me to give political donations:
1) Represent the party or candidate I already support.
2) Call me on the phone and say something honest and normal like, "Hello, I am Joe Blow calling on behalf of The Bureaucracy You Dislike Less Than the Other. We need money to win the next election. Will you give us money?"
Answer: "Yes."
Be straight, get dough.
I don't want to be bonded to government. I want it limited and bonded to me/us.
@ALthouse I was also perturbed by that ticket nonsense from Obama. I think I still signed up for a ticket. But I used my spam-catcher email, so there's that at least. I rarely even read the subject in that inbox -- I'll just go in and delete everything occasionally.
I've been reading and commenting here for seven years and I would not call you by your first name.
I believe she has stated more than once that she prefers to be addressed as "Althouse" on this blog.
If I knew you in real life I would not, either.
I probably would...unless she asked me to call her Althouse instead. Most people have referred to me by my last name my whole life. My father and I share the same last name so my family uses my middle name. Acquaintances sometimes use my first name and friends and co - workers use my last name.
He just can't imagine how Obama lied to us, looked down upon us, with the help of all the Democrats...but, WE can.
Call me on the phone and say something honest and normal like, "Hello, I am Joe Blow calling on behalf of The Bureaucracy You Dislike Less Than the Other. We need money to win the next election. Will you give us money?"
Similar to the "I need money for beer" panhandler strategy.
When was Glenn in Texas or are those red states all so similar that no one can tell them apart ?
A girl from Iowa starts at Harvard. There's a welcoming tea one afternoon. An older lady professor ask her where she hails from."Iowa", she says. "My Dear, At Harvard we pronounce it 'Ohio'".
" Napoleon thought his countrymen were unified and loyal. "
To the degree it mattered to Napoleon, they were.
He pushed them (especially with trade restrictions, taxation and conscription) far beyond what the British dared to do with their own. And the French obeyed his orders, faithfully, in the main. In spite of his killing off almost 2 million Frenchmen and ruining the country.
His generals finally had enough when the overwhelming allied armies (outnumbering the French at least 5:1) were at the gates of Paris in 1814.
Napoleon certainly could not blame his people for his failures.
The job of a press secy is to lie, dissemble and mislead, in support of his boss.
That's OK, I guess, and there is no obvious reason to think Ernest was better or worse than his most of his predecessors or successors.
But, still, his job, by which we recognize him, was to lie, so why would you make him your front man when asking for money, where you would think a reputation for honesty and sincerity would matter? It just seems odd...
And yet it's "clear" that there's "chaos"... and not just chaos, "utter chaos."
Very similar in Washington DC to "udder chaos", when members of congress don't know exactly which teat to yank on.
"I'm one of the few people left who does not like to be addressed by first name without invitation."
Wow, you're a stuffy old bird - aren't you.
If someone told me about that, and I was introduced to you, I'd call you by your first name, just to annoy you.
Total KAOS vs. Complete Control
Quoting one of my posts, McCharlie2 wrote:
"'Now it seems that Trump is faulted for NOT having handlers and string-puppets.'
"He has those, but they're on Fox."
Assuming your post isn't just "liberal" BS (as the ritualistic invocation of Fox or "Faux" News usually is), could you give me some details who on Fox is "handling" Trump or pulling his strings, and how specifically they are doing that? I thought this years party line was that he was a "rogue."
It bothers me that everybody from the phone company to my dentist sends me missives addressing me by my first name, but it is the in thing these days so it is best to just to just ignore it. Protesting is not going to change them.
I liked it better when I lived in New York City, and such missives would begin, "Hey, mac" or "Dear Asshole."
Ann Althouse said...Well, of course, you don't want to make a habit of lying to the American people. That's just pathological. A good press secretary lies when it serves a specific purpose. If you just make a habit out of lying, you lose the advantage of all the times when saying what's true is actually in your interest and you miss all the cute chances — like the one you're using here, Josh — where telling a cagy truth works the same way as a good straightforward bald-faced lie.
That reminded me of the times Pres. Obama didn't seem to understand what "bluffing" meant. I googled for a direct quote of the instance I remembered, but was depressed (though not surprised) by the top results:
Obama Not Bluffing on Iran threat [turns out the Obama admin. did everything it could to keep Iran happy--including caving to Russia, etc--so his threat to use military force against Iran was most definitely a bluff]
Obama's Chemical Weapon 'Red Line' Is No Bluff [whoops--totally was]
Obama's not bluffing on closing Guantanamo [oops!]
Obama to Iran & Israel: "As President, I Don't Bluff" [oh don't'cha??]
Finally got to the one I wanted: Obama Warns Cantor: 'Don't call my bluff' [that's not, you know, how bluffs are supposed to work]
Anyway a bluff is only as good as the credibility of it's assertion, so the Professor is 100% correct that saying you don't always lie/bluff is meaningless--only a fool would do so (or admit to doing so). Not sure what that makes President Obama, though...
This email just emphasizes that most democrat voters are stupid.
A cow who works with "Siegfried" = Udder KAOS
I have to wonder, based on articles about how the Democratic campaign was run in 2012 using friend lists of known Obama supporters with a scoring system rating the likelihood of convincing those friends to vote for their candidate, if anyone was engaged in person by a FB friend about (1) voting for the least likely-to-succeed (R) candidate as a Cross over in the primary, and then was encouraged by any means necessary - to vote for the anointed (D) candidate in the general election.
Whoops - insert (2) after 'then.'
When the wrestler Chris Benoit murdered his family and then killed himself, various WWE stars did the news & talk show circuit to talk about the incident (and of course do damage control). I remember watching Larry King. These wrestlers, while "in character", talk amazing amounts of smack, curse, insult, and generally exhibit the worst behavior imaginable. When talking as themselves, and asked to speak about the incident, they started with "Well Mr. King..."
King immediately said, "Call me Larry."
Despite their stage personas, these guys are for the most part southern born or military brats, and were taught that if you're speaking to someone old enough to be your father or grandfather, you call them Mister. It was an interesting moment.
Damn Ann... you woke up and realized Obama was the pits and Trump is strangely making a decent President.
Congrats. My wife detested Trump while I saw him as someone who told it like it is.
Now she has came around. Still does not like his tweets but she thinks he is not bad... not bad at all!
Josh just popped in to madly gesticulate and grimace, over-earnestly.
This guy was always a barrowload of armpits and ass when he was providing his daily bullshittings; nice to see nothing's changed since he left the WH.
I feel like his parents really screwed him up with the names.
"What are we going to name this baby? He's Earnest. Everybody who looks at him will say, look at that Earnest baby."
"I know. Let's call him Josh!"
"Josh? Josh Earnest?"
43 years later…
"I'm earnest! I'm earnest, damn it."
"You're joshing me, Josh."
If only his name was Ernest Earnest.
Don't forget Major Major Major.
When he joined the army, they had to make him..
Major Major Major Major.
Post a Comment